3 ms·
I've been following this story for 12 months or more. I've read a lot of criticism and deep discussions that go way beyond my capability to understand. But we
by brc 15y ago
I've been following this story for 12 months or more. I've read a lot of criticism and deep discussions that go way beyond my capability to understand.
But we should know, soon enough, if it's a fraud or not.
Either the thing works as advertised, or it doesn't.
Even if this particular test has 'teething problems' I would assume that, within a week or two, all will be known.
To me, it's a case of sit back, remain patient and open minded, and watch to see what happens.
It's not like he's asking for taxpayer money or subsidies. If he ends up fleecing a rich company or individual, well, that sort of things goes on every day. It would be a drop in the ocean compared to, say, pets.com or any number of mega-flop movie releases.
I just don't get the invective directed at this guy and his project. If he's wrong, there will be plenty of time for gloating and schadenfreude. If he's right, a lot of people are going to look very silly with their big statements.
- wpietri 15y agoThe invective comes because he flouts the way scientists normally go about announcing and proving major scientific discoveries. And that matters because the scientific approach is evolved to be very different than what scam artists and loons gets up to. One reason many people are unwilling to be patient and open-minded is that they've already done that in the past, and had their patience worn thin by said scam artists and loons. Another is that they respect (or have worked hard to become) actual scientists who put forth the extra time and effort to properly demonstrate and document novel findings.